http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19049
Ira Rosen changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|NEW
AssignedTo|irar at il dot ibm.com
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46331
Jerry DeLisle changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2010-11-09
.c scan-assembler jelly
at -m32 on x86_64-apple-darwin10 with errors of the form...
Executing on host: /sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/xgcc
-B/sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/darwin_objdir/gcc/
/sw/src/fink.build/gcc46-4.6.0-1000/gcc-4.6-20101109/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46268
Laurynas Biveinis changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46331
--- Comment #4 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-10
04:58:23 UTC ---
Author: jvdelisle
Date: Wed Nov 10 04:58:16 2010
New Revision: 166520
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166520
Log:
2010-11-09 Jerry DeLisle
Mikael Mori
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42690
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=40436
--- Comment #37 from Jan Hubicka 2010-11-10
02:35:23 UTC ---
Author: hubicka
Date: Wed Nov 10 02:35:19 2010
New Revision: 166517
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166517
Log:
PR tree-optimization/40436
* ipa-inline.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46405
Summary: Preprocessor generated code can exceed 132 characters
Product: gcc
Version: unknown
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
Assi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45478
--- Comment #5 from Zdenek Sojka 2010-11-10 01:28:36
UTC ---
Created attachment 22361
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22361
another testcase
This was reduced from gcc.target/i386/funcspec-3.c
Compiler output:
$ gcc -O2 -fno-
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46404
Summary: [4.6 Regression] ICE: definition in block 5 does not
dominate use in block 32 with -O -fgraphite-identity
-fno-tree-scev-cprop
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35290
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||TREE
Last reconfirmed|2008-02-22 10:48:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22358|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35290
--- Comment #2 from davidxl 2010-11-09 23:11:38
UTC ---
This seems resolved in trunk gcc.
David
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #12 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 23:08:40
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> (In reply to comment #10)
> > I wouldn't worry about bool for this code.
> >
> > I'm not sure that int64_t is sure to be defined. uint64_t is in the
> > con
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #11 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 23:07:45
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> I wouldn't worry about bool for this code.
>
> I'm not sure that int64_t is sure to be defined. uint64_t is in the configure
> script and so will be defined
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
Benjamin Kosnik changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||bkoz at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #10
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46403
Summary: inefficient PRE bloat code size
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
AssignedTo: unassi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #10 from Ian Lance Taylor 2010-11-09 22:24:59
UTC ---
I wouldn't worry about bool for this code.
I'm not sure that int64_t is sure to be defined. uint64_t is in the configure
script and so will be defined for sure.
This is going to
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46402
--- Comment #1 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-09
22:19:59 UTC ---
Currently latest version of libquad:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/fortran/2010-11/msg00173.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46402
Summary: libquadmath: Add fmalq
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: fortran
AssignedTo: unassig...@gcc.gnu.org
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #13 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2010-11-09 22:17:31 UTC ---
> I hope the respin will render this moot.
Right, our mails crossed :-)
Thanks.
Rainer
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #9 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2010-11-09 22:13:39 UTC ---
> How about this? Compiles OK on i686-pc-cygwin with -std=c89 added to the
> cflags.
Haven't tried yet, but wouldn't it be cleaner to use code as in
gcc/system.h
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46373
--- Comment #8 from Jerry DeLisle 2010-11-09
22:12:07 UTC ---
Aside from Janne's comments about getting rid of this function completely, I
think the little fix is a candidate for back port to 4.4 and 4.5. What do you
think Janne?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #12 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 22:08:49
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> > --- Comment #7 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09
> > 21:21:07 UTC ---
>
> > I would expect so, but haven't audited the code. Of course, we *have* a c99
> > compi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #11 from ro at CeBiTec dot Uni-Bielefeld.DE 2010-11-09 22:06:57 UTC ---
> --- Comment #7 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:21:07
> UTC ---
> I would expect so, but haven't audited the code. Of course, we *have* a c99
> compiler availabl
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22355|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Attachment #22354|0 |1
is obsolete|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #7 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:54:31
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> The LTO plugin is a fairly small piece of code; how hard would it be to
> eliminate any C99 dependencies?
Just looking at that now in response to Eric's comment
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ian at airs dot com
--- Comment #6 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #9 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:35:09
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > How about if we make building the plugin conditional on having c99
> > available?
>
> That wouldn't be consistent with us currently requiring only a C90 comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #8 from Eric Botcazou 2010-11-09
21:31:59 UTC ---
> I would expect so, but haven't audited the code. Of course, we *have* a c99
> compiler available after stage 1; is there a way to disable lto-plugin just
> during stage1/non-bootstr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46401
Summary: [4.5/4.6 Regression] very slow compile time with
-Wsequence-point
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
C
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #7 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:21:07
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #6)
> > How about if we make building the plugin conditional on having c99
> > available?
>
> That wouldn't be consistent with us currently requiring only a C90 comp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
Eric Botcazou changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||ebotcazou at gcc dot
|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #5 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:04:29
UTC ---
BTW note that this needs a run of autoheader in the lto-plugin dir, as well as
autoconf there and at top-level.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #5 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:03:50
UTC ---
> (Don't forget to regenerate the two configure files,
And run autoheader in lto-plugin, I should have added there.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
--- Comment #4 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:00:47
UTC ---
Created attachment 22354
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22354
proposed patch
ISTM the main issue (common to this and Bug 46397) is C99, so this patch adds a
test for
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
--- Comment #4 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 21:00:57
UTC ---
Created attachment 22355
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22355
first spin of trial patch
How about if we make building the plugin conditional on having c99 available?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46362
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46397
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=19049
Thomas Koenig changed:
What|Removed |Added
Last reconfirmed|2007-07-09 07:42:10 |2010-11-09
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45971
--- Comment #10 from Sebastian Pop 2010-11-09
20:05:13 UTC ---
Created attachment 22353
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22353
patch
The attached patch solves the problem. Not yet tested other than this PR's
testcase.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45971
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned at
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
H.J. Lu changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|UNCONFIRMED
Ever Confirmed|1
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
--- Comment #8 from Paolo Carlini 2010-11-09
19:55:49 UTC ---
Thanks.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
--- Comment #7 from Ian Lance Taylor 2010-11-09 19:55:05
UTC ---
Created attachment 22352
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22352
Possible patch
This is the patch I tested which drops the inner "()".
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
Ian Lance Taylor changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=28627
--- Comment #3 from Dave Korn 2010-11-09 19:50:53
UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> As we want to keep here errors instead of warnings and the cgraph pass is
> modeled that way that the diagnostic of second error isn't possible, I decided
> to a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46400
--- Comment #5 from Paolo Carlini 2010-11-09
19:44:16 UTC ---
Created attachment 22351
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22351
gzipped .ii
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46400
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46387
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46400
--- Comment #3 from Michael Strashun 2010-11-09
19:36:37 UTC ---
It seems to me that bug reporting guideline prohibits attaching archives, but,
probably, I have misunderstood.
I ll try to do my best at reducing, but it is not fast and easy task
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43808
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46319
Dave Korn changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||patch
URL|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43808
--- Comment #13 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-09
19:31:48 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 9 19:31:45 2010
New Revision: 166509
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166509
Log:
PR target/43808
* cfgexpand.c (partition_s
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46036
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46036
--- Comment #4 from Sebastian Pop 2010-11-09 19:23:47
UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Tue Nov 9 19:23:43 2010
New Revision: 166508
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166508
Log:
Fix PR46036.
2010-11-09 Sebastian Pop
PR tr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46171
Jakub Jelinek changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||spop at gcc dot gnu.org
--- Comment #15 f
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45314
Sebastian Pop changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|ASSIGNED|RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45314
--- Comment #12 from Sebastian Pop 2010-11-09
19:15:39 UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Tue Nov 9 19:15:36 2010
New Revision: 166507
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166507
Log:
Fix Changelog entry.
2010-11-09 Sebastian Pop
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45314
--- Comment #11 from Sebastian Pop 2010-11-09
19:15:19 UTC ---
The patch fixing this has been committed with the wrong PR number on:
Author: spop
Date: Tue Nov 9 19:08:57 2010
New Revision: 166506
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45902
--- Comment #14 from Sebastian Pop 2010-11-09
19:09:01 UTC ---
Author: spop
Date: Tue Nov 9 19:08:57 2010
New Revision: 166506
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166506
Log:
Fix PR45314: backport revision 163123.
2010-11-09
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45663
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-09
19:06:09 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 9 19:06:06 2010
New Revision: 166505
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166505
Log:
PR middle-end/45663
* gcc.dg/guality/sra-1.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46171
--- Comment #4 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-09
19:04:48 UTC ---
Author: jakub
Date: Tue Nov 9 19:04:44 2010
New Revision: 166504
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166504
Log:
PR debug/46171
* df-problems.c (struct dead
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46400
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46313
--- Comment #15 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-09
18:42:52 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> However, GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN is only:
>GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN*2+4 = 63*2+4 = 130 characters
Sorry, GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN is only 63 characters. The other was
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46400
--- Comment #1 from Michael Strashun 2010-11-09
18:40:38 UTC ---
Preprocessed file to compile (too large to attach ):
http://www.mstr.lv/test_case.cpp
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46400
Summary: g++ Segmentation Fault on heavily templated project.
Product: gcc
Version: 4.5.1
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: c++
AssignedTo:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46313
--- Comment #14 from Steve Kargl
2010-11-09 18:27:49 UTC ---
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 05:59:17PM +, janus at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:
>
> Index: gcc/fortran/class.c
> ===
> --- gcc
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46313
--- Comment #13 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-09
18:24:28 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)
> + char tmp[GFC_MAX_SYMBOL_LEN];
> + strcpy (&tmp[0], derived->name);
> + sprintf (string, "%s_%s", ns->proc_name->name, tmp);
> +
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46313
--- Comment #12 from Tobias Burnus 2010-11-09
18:16:06 UTC ---
I think one needs to add all names to the namespace:
___
___
etc. (Note: This can give extremely long variable names; I am not sure how
assemblers handle those.)
Note: I see a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||hjl.tools at gmail dot com
--- Comment #5
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
Paolo Carlini changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||paolo.carlini at oracle dot
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46269
--- Comment #4 from Richard Henderson 2010-11-09
18:06:35 UTC ---
Since updateBuildingSite is transaction_callable, not
transaction_safe, we should handle this no matter how
the other functions are annotated.
When atomic_exchange_and_add is not
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46313
--- Comment #11 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-09 17:59:04 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> > One way to fix this is to use the top-level namespace (i.e. program or
> > module)
> > for the naming of the internal symbols, instead of the d
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46387
--- Comment #5 from Jakub Jelinek 2010-11-09
17:48:04 UTC ---
The problem is when processing
(insn:TI 75 270 251 5 (cond_exec (eq (reg:BI 262 p6 [394])
(const_int 0 [0]))
(set (mem/c/i:SI (reg/f:DI 32 r33 [409]) [2 x+0 S4 A64]
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46269
Aldy Hernandez changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
AssignedTo|unassigned a
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44759
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
--- Comment #3 from Eelis 2010-11-09
17:26:40 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> I'm pretty sure to have seen this behavior mentioned already...
You may be thinking of bug #36002. That one was about errors emitted during
compilation, and has bee
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46377
--- Comment #4 from Martin Jambor 2010-11-09
17:25:04 UTC ---
Patch submitted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg00933.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44755
Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46351
--- Comment #5 from Martin Jambor 2010-11-09
17:24:50 UTC ---
Patch submitted to the mailing list:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2010-11/msg00933.html
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44759
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-09 17:23:11 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Tue Nov 9 17:23:05 2010
New Revision: 166500
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166500
Log:
PR target/44759
* config
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42240
--- Comment #17 from Georg Lay 2010-11-09 17:20:59 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #14)
> Created attachment 22339 [details]
> Initial patch to fix the bug
>
> BB reordering pass is suppressed for naked functions. Also suppressed when the
> end of e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=44755
--- Comment #1 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke
2010-11-09 17:21:08 UTC ---
Author: amylaar
Date: Tue Nov 9 17:21:02 2010
New Revision: 166499
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166499
Log:
PR target/44755
* config.gcc (pi
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=42240
--- Comment #16 from Georg Lay 2010-11-09 17:16:02 UTC ---
Created attachment 22349
--> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=22349
PR target/42240
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46396
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Component|driver |target
--- Comment #2 from Andrew Pinski
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=43603
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
CC||dannf at dannf dot org
--- Comment #6 fro
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46384
Andrew Pinski changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |RESOLVED
Resolution|
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46399
Andreas Krebbel changed:
What|Removed |Added
Keywords||wrong-code
Priority|P3
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46399
Summary: Missing type promotion for library call argument
Product: gcc
Version: 4.4.3
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: major
Priority: P3
Component: middle-end
AssignedT
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46313
--- Comment #10 from janus at gcc dot gnu.org 2010-11-09 17:07:24 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> One way to fix this is to use the top-level namespace (i.e. program or module)
> for the naming of the internal symbols, instead of the direct pare
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46332
--- Comment #2 from Paolo Carlini 2010-11-09
17:02:21 UTC ---
Actually, if this happens also in error messages cannot be a demangler issue
only. I'm pretty sure to have seen this behavior mentioned already... Ian, any
hint?
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46355
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Known to work||4.6.0
Summary|[4.5/4.6 Regr
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46355
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-09
16:54:11 UTC ---
Author: rguenth
Date: Tue Nov 9 16:54:05 2010
New Revision: 166498
URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?root=gcc&view=rev&rev=166498
Log:
2010-11-09 Richard Guenther
PR tree-op
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46398
--- Comment #3 from Richard Guenther 2010-11-09
16:49:48 UTC ---
-O1 on any platform with the following patch applied (or not-yet-found
carefully
crafted disabling of passes before the existing FRE pass):
Index: gcc/passes.c
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46398
Richard Guenther changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|WAITING |ASSIGNED
Last reconfirmed|2010-11-09
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
